Go to page

Domo Arigato

I had a friend who was taking art lessons through Utemy or whatever it's called. Anyways he turned out to be a total sped. He could apparently only draw when being instructed. Attempts to do so when not being instructed looked only slightly better that what Chris Chan can do. With Utemy however he could manage to make really amazing pencil drawn art that was incredibly lifelike and professional. I argued with him constantly that he could do it on his own but he would insist that he needed Utemy to show him how to "draw with his shoulder."

Something tells me he'd flunk art school if he had homework and had to use that as an excuse. 'Course art school these days is pretty much a joke (moreso America than anywhere else), so who knows. They might even praise him.

Why are you so alarmed?

A bit off topic, but there seems to be this cosmic correlation between artistic drive and sexual drive. I'd argue that 9 / 10 artists began drawing to vent sexual frustration, and historically speaking, there seems to be a long history of artists being complete perverts from Raphael to John K. It also always seems like schizophrenics / people prone to visual hallucination have bizarre sexual obsessions/fixations, but maybe I'm over speculating.

Regardless of how shallow/exploitive porn can be, the art advice itself is pretty solid and the artist's examples are dynamic and nicely contoured. I think it's healthy to indulge yourself as an artist (or just somebody who likes to draw), Da Vinci would often sketch grotesque cariacatures in the margins of his notebooks to contrast with his studies on ideal beauty, and I'm sure there's some binder filled with Da Vinci's fag hentai that's in a plastic bag at the bottom of some Italian river.

Buying a Switch & Animal Crossing with Trump bucks

Something tells me he'd flunk art school if he had homework and had to use that as an excuse. 'Course art school these days is pretty much a joke (moreso America than anywhere else), so who knows. They might even praise him.

Yeah, people like him personally disgust me on a level I can't quite describe. To me art has always been about expressing something, creating something that I can call my own. However he's content to follow instructions without which he cannot properly express anything. It makes me wonder if any of his ambitions are his own or just things he was told to value and seek. Though I guess that's pretty normal these days. People have abandoned any sense of self and as a result art has suffered.

"Dude, where's the bus?"

Art sincerity, that's it! A lot of modern art seems to have lost its sincerity in place of following a very formalized technique or popular trend. The problem is when people think formal technique or trends are more important than any sincere themes it expresses.

whoosh arthritis

Art sincerity, that's it! A lot of modern art seems to have lost its sincerity in place of following a very formalized technique or popular trend. The problem is when people think formal technique or trends are more important than any sincere themes it expresses.

feels pretty true especially since more artists have moved more to mainstream platforms to post art instead of deviantart or other similar sites due to the appeal of having more people see their art and getting some more gratification out of it

sure,I don't think its personally wrong (just kinda dumb and pathetic)to want to gain likes or followers by following a trend but I've seen many young artist feel discredited whenever they're own works don't get traction so they join popular tags or change their styles to mimic popular artists to get the same type of attention...then to get further dissapointed by the lack of attention their own concepts get when they try again

like whats stopping them from feeling happy about making own content,too addicted to positive feedback? heh,gay.

Honestly, getting most of your info about the basics from art from YT in this day and age is only natural. The technology has progressed to a point in which you can share information really quickly and find better tutorials. I remember as a kid not even having that. And when the first art tutorial videos on YT started popping up, you had a bunch of shit you had to shift through to get to the gold, but that's for everything in my opinion. There's always going to be people who take advantage of that. copy people to get more attention, and continue the cycle, that's just reality. I'm much more glad kids have a variety of things to find nowadays then not having that at all unless you joined specific spaces. The art community has always been pretty gated, but that's just my thoughts.

Some bad art advice I've seen people give to beginners is in regards to how they price their commissions. I've seen pros literally say to newbie artists "don't price under x, undercharging is bad for all of us! Charge hourly/minimum wage!" I've literally seen pros shame artists for charging $10 for work saying they're the reason why people constantly ask artists to lower their prices instead of...you know...telling people to fuck off? And the worst part is that you see these people tell others to raise their prices, but you'll never see these people buy the art they tell those to raise the prices of, meaning you even admit yourself that you know the work is not ready to be sold for money yet. Come on.

I'm just going to say that this feels so disconnected from reality, it boggles my mind. Beginners are not ready for commissions UNLESS they show the necessary skills to have work of value. This is rarely ever the case which is why many beginners undercharge because 1.) not to be harsh, but no one is going to buy it and 2.) you have to develop a market for your work. If you have none of these and you listen to these idiots spouting this nonsense you are setting up younger artists for failure because no one wants to buy sub-par work. People generally want to get quality-made custom art. Art is not a necessity so it's even more important to stick out and provide something worthwhile.

For freelancers, charging minimum wage hourly makes sense as you are expected to be working on the job at home (sometimes) essentially. But beginners? Absolutely not. I'd instead recommend charging low to start but increasing it in increments. Not only do you develop a flow of what you are doing, but it also allows you to develop a steady market overtime without scaring off half your following because you jacked up prices beyond your skill level.

have a fungus

But beginners? Absolutely not. I'd instead recommend charging low to start but increasing it in increments. Not only do you develop a flow of what you are doing, but it also allows you to develop a steady market overtime without scaring off half your following because you jacked up prices beyond your skill level.

I'd argue that beginners shouldn't even be doing commissions at all. Until your technique is good enough to be considered good, if not amazing, by almost anyone, you shouldn't be wasting the time of others by suggesting that they should pay you to create art. No-one wants to pay someone for an abomination made with sub-standard technical skill, and you're setting yourself up for disappointment by doing that.

Other forms of writing can have a really nice touch for designs especially. I agree that sometimes it's best to stick to what makes you unique, but if you're handwriting is illegible and sloppy, it's probably best to stick to text barring signatures that should be unique to you.

I find that a lot of beginners tend to write out text and it turns out extremely messy and muddy. The only case this doesn't apply is once again, a signature.

I'd argue that beginners shouldn't even be doing commissions at all. Until your technique is good enough to be considered good, if not amazing, by almost anyone, you shouldn't be wasting the time of others by suggesting that they should pay you to create art. No-one wants to pay someone for an abomination made with sub-standard technical skill, and you're setting yourself up for disappointment by doing that.

In a perfect world, I'd agree, but I know some beginner charge for commissions anyways, including myself at one point. I did quick commission stuff at school for some lunch money and I knew some people doing commission when they were 14 on da. It's really nothing new other than a change in the environment. That being said, I do agree overall that you should not charge for art if your work is sub-par. As I mentioned beforehand, it's just setting yourself up for failure/disappointment.

I do blame part of this on the "fast" nature of social media nowadays. Many people don't want to believe that art takes TIME and EFFORT. So many kids see the fast nature of social media artists, don't understand many of them worked to get to where they are or made work well in advance and think, "I need to be at x or else I'm a failure." When you really don't have to. So you get a bunch of kids rushing to get to a pro skill level or rushing the mindset of being a pro level, thus a lot of beginners using commissions to validate their work.

Speaking of which, the art community does have a subset that believes in the "fake it till you make it" category. And while I agree you shouldn't be overly cringey over how you treat your work, being humble can go a long way. Don't full on hate your work (saying your work is trash when it's average is still cringe to me) but don't be arrogant either.

Your local evil magical girl.

Honestly, getting most of your info about the basics from art from YT in this day and age is only natural. The technology has progressed to a point in which you can share information really quickly and find better tutorials. I remember as a kid not even having that. And when the first art tutorial videos on YT started popping up, you had a bunch of shit you had to shift through to get to the gold, but that's for everything in my opinion.

True, though I still don't think Youtube is good enough to get a full art education there. There are lots of good art channels I can recommend, like Proko, and other more obscure ones that I like, but, overall the site is filled with scam artists and time-wasters that if you aren't careful will be more damaging in the long run.

I won't get tired of pointing out how may youtube art channels purposely don't mention key information unless your are subscribed to their Patreon, and sometimes not even that will help you.

The anime youtube art channels are especially bad, I could only really recommend one that is really good, two being generous. For example: mark Crilley. Good artist? Yes. Good teacher? No.

I think youtube still has a long way to catch up to be a viable way to learn fully or ditch art school. Most of the best knowledge out there is still either paywalled or in books.

"Don't do studies. Drawing the same thing over won't lead to improvement"
If you can't get something right, practice makes improvement. Maybe not the same subject every time *ahem* Tearzah, but a page of hands or feet etc. is absolutely good for betterment.

I feel it depends on what you're going for. Even I admit it's much easier to solve problems of well-known programs than something more obscure. There's no denying that a lot of professional illustrators use Adobe Suite (which I already have problems with but that's for another day) so it's basically become industry standard. I don't think PS is the best for illustration as many claim it is, but for editing drawings it works out pretty well. Paint Tool SAI has been pirated to hell and back so much so that you can get a copy pretty easy and Clip usually has sales monthly, but I feel if you're going to invest in a program it should be that rather than paying almost $20 a month for something you should be able to get a one time payment for.

I do agree that pushing towards paid digital art programs isn't the best for beginners (Krita, Fire Alpaca and Medibang are good free alternatives to see if you're really interested in digital drawing) You shouldn't spend an exorbitant of money on a tablet/ drawing program when starting out.

To add onto this, telling people to buy screen tablets, even when they don't need it is AWFUL advice. Screen tablets are a pain to maintain and now you have the extra problem of worrying about your screen potentially breaking making the tablet unusable. I've been seeing art tubers shill out the Wacom One which is supposed to be an "affordable" screen tablet for beginners. Which runs at the lovely price of $400 USD. The fact that people are trying to argue this is "affordable" is laughable to say the least when you have competitors that sell screen tablets for half that price. Compared to the amount of money you could just spend investing in a decent monitor, I don't feel it's worth it UNLESS you have some sort of issue in that you need to see what you're drawing correctly.

No secret, it's the meat. Don't skimp on the meat.

I feel it depends on what you're going for. Even I admit it's much easier to solve problems of well-known programs than something more obscure. There's no denying that a lot of professional illustrators use Adobe Suite (which I already have problems with but that's for another day) so it's basically become industry standard. I don't think PS is the best for illustration as many claim it is, but for editing drawings it works out pretty well. Paint Tool SAI has been pirated to hell and back so much so that you can get a copy pretty easy and Clip usually has sales monthly, but I feel if you're going to invest in a program it should be that rather than paying almost $20 a month for something you should be able to get a one time payment for.

I do agree that pushing towards paid digital art programs isn't the best for beginners (Krita, Fire Alpaca and Medibang are good free alternatives to see if you're really interested in digital drawing) You shouldn't spend an exorbitant of money on a tablet/ drawing program when starting out.

To add onto this, telling people to buy screen tablets, even when they don't need it is AWFUL advice. Screen tablets are a pain to maintain and now you have the extra problem of worrying about your screen potentially breaking making the tablet unusable. I've been seeing art tubers shill out the Wacom One which is supposed to be an "affordable" screen tablet for beginners. Which runs at the lovely price of $400 USD. The fact that people are trying to argue this is "affordable" is laughable to say the least when you have competitors that sell screen tablets for half that price. Compared to the amount of money you could just spend investing in a decent monitor, I don't feel it's worth it UNLESS you have some sort of issue in that you need to see what you're drawing correctly.